2017 Chicago Bears Season Predictions

[Beengay fudgepackers]

Lol... The reason you remember those jumps, is because they're out of the ordinary.

Also, give me a break with the Cowboys. That was an 11-5 team in 2014, who won a playoff game and came controversially close to beating GB in Lambeau. That was a team who had been perennially competitive for 7-8 years. Then, had a disastrous year where they lost their QB and star WR for the season in 2015, lost their two best defensive players and started 3 QB's. Then got healthy and had a rookie 4th rounder come out of nowhere to play even better than Romo ever had. That's a team who was expected to get healthy and be good.

Just like with the Bears in 2009, who lost Urlacher. Those two anecdotal pieces of evidence, aren't even teams who were going through a rebuild like we are. They were established teams, who had winning seasons and were expected to make a run (Peter King predicted Bears to the SB in 2009) and then lost key players. Then upon regaining health the next year, they went to the playoffs like was previously expected.

Yes, every couple of years or. There is a team who makes that jump. However, it is not the norm. The norm is not jumping from top 5 draft pick, to 11+ wins. Give me a break dude.

The norm would be the Oakland Raiders, who were in a rebuild like we are and took a young QB. Sucked for a year, went 7-9 and made strides the next. Then, in 2016, grabbed a WC berth. The Seahawks with the way they came along from a shitty latter part of the 2000's, to 7-9, 8-8 into finding their QB and hitting their stride defensively to go 11-5 in 2012 and winning the SB in 2013.

Well then by your logic we're two years off from being good and a year off from being ok. This team blows. I hate how you keep trying to polish a terd. This team won't be good until Trubisky is a good QB. That won't happen this year. This team won't be good until shaheen becomes a weapon in the passing game, which won't happen this year. This team won't be good until the defense shows it can stay healthy AND be dominant as a unit. There will be some growing pains this year with that unit even if they stay healthy. I'd say we're lucky to get 5 wins this year.

 

[richig07]

Well then by your logic we're two years off from being good and a year off from being ok. This team blows. I hate how you keep trying to polish a terd. This team won't be good until Trubisky is a good QB. That won't happen this year. This team won't be good until shaheen becomes a weapon in the passing game, which won't happen this year. This team won't be good until the defense shows it can stay healthy AND be dominant as a unit. There will be some growing pains this year with that unit even if they stay healthy. I'd say we're lucky to get 5 wins this year.

Well then by your logic we're two years off from being good and a year off from being ok.

This is year 3 of the process. Yes, starting with a new QB sets things back, but we've been building this Oline and defense for 3 years and it's considered (not just by Bears fans) potentially one of the best units in each of those areas. QB is really the only area we're starting fresh at. Everything else has been coming along for a little while.

This team blows. I hate how you keep trying to polish a terd.

I've predicted 7-9 or 8-8 for our record. Which is very fair and by no means some grandiose declaration that we're going to be good.

Why are you advancing a straw-man argument, which implies that I have said this team is going to get to the post-season or something? Most people I see on different Bears forums I frequent believe the team will win 6-7 games. I believe 7 or 8. Where is this raging homer in me? I don't see it.

Most also concur that we have a very nice looking young defense, a great young back and Oline. That's all I have ever said.

I just think you casually glance at the record and see 3-13, and forget the horror show of playing 4 QB's and 137 positional guys on each side. It's a lazy and dismissive argument. Could any team of been successful with that last year? No, the year was a fucking wash dude... Matt Barkley started the most games at QB for us and now he's most likely polishing his resume to go to job interviews with high schools looking for offensive coordinators. In the middle of the season, we had a 3-4 week span where we were missing every starter on offense but Howard. To go along with 6 of our front 7 starters. Do you realize how absurd that is?

In 2015, this team was largely considered ahead of schedule when they played Denver to the final seconds and beat GB in Lambeau the following week. This roster is better than that roster was, without much of a doubt really. Which is why I think they can improve a mere one or two games on that season. How is that nuts?

You think a big part of this team's growth is dependent on Adam Shaheen? Lol. I don't even know what to say to that. He's got a lot of raw ability, and he's a project. I look forward to seeing where's at this time next year. However, right now, I think most concur that TE is very deep on this team. Miller and Sims are a more than competent duo. Then if Shaheen can get something going to, even better.

This team by zero means "blows". They have a potential top 5-10 D, a top 5 Oline (easy) and a great run game. They lack greatly in skill areas, but if you play good defense and run the ball successfully in the NFL. Guess what? You're going to have a chance in the vast majority of your games.

There is a massive failure to understand certain things in the NFL, by even smart fans. Which I consider you to be. I don't mean to have our first interaction upon you returning to the board to be a disagreement, but it is what it is. lol

Fans like yourself will be surprised at how many tough games we hang around in this year. I'm looking forward to tomorrow.

 

[Beengay fudgepackers]

Well then by your logic we're two years off from being good and a year off from being ok.

This is year 3 of the process. Yes, starting with a new QB sets things back, but we've been building this Oline and defense for 3 years and it's considered (not just by Bears fans) potentially one of the best units in each of those areas. QB is really the only area we're starting fresh at. Everything else has been coming along for a little while.

This team blows. I hate how you keep trying to polish a terd.

I've predicted 7-9 or 8-8 for our record. Which is very fair and by no means some grandiose declaration that we're going to be good.

Why are you advancing a straw-man argument, which implies that I have said this team is going to get to the post-season or something? Most people I see on different Bears forums I frequent believe the team will win 6-7 games. I believe 7 or 8. Where is this raging homer in me? I don't see it.

Most also concur that we have a very nice looking young defense, a great young back and Oline. That's all I have ever said.

I just think you casually glance at the record and see 3-13, and forget the horror show of playing 4 QB's and 137 positional guys on each side. It's a lazy and dismissive argument. Could any team of been successful with that last year? No, the year was a fucking wash dude... Matt Barkley started the most games at QB for us and now he's most likely polishing his resume to go to job interviews with high schools looking for offensive coordinators. In the middle of the season, we had a 3-4 week span where we were missing every starter on offense but Howard. To go along with 6 of our front 7 starters. Do you realize how absurd that is?

In 2015, this team was largely considered ahead of schedule when they played Denver to the final seconds and beat GB in Lambeau the following week. This roster is better than that roster was, without much of a doubt really. Which is why I think they can improve a mere one or two games on that season. How is that nuts?

You think a big part of this team's growth is dependent on Adam Shaheen? Lol. I don't even know what to say to that. He's got a lot of raw ability, and he's a project. I look forward to seeing where's at this time next year. However, right now, I think most concur that TE is very deep on this team. Miller and Sims are a more than competent duo. Then if Shaheen can get something going to, even better.

This team by zero means "blows". They have a potential top 5-10 D, a top 5 Oline (easy) and a great run game. They lack greatly in skill areas, but if you play good defense and run the ball successfully in the NFL. Guess what? You're going to have a chance in the vast majority of your games.

There is a massive failure to understand certain things in the NFL, by even smart fans. Which I consider you to be. I don't mean to have our first interaction upon you returning to the board to be a disagreement, but it is what it is. lol

Fans like yourself will be surprised at how many tough games we hang around in this year. I'm looking forward to tomorrow.

We always disagree. We will just have to wait and see. For the record, I was right about us last year.

 

[anotheridiot]

Broken collar bone for White, season is over, bear career is over before it began.

Maybe now Gentry get a real shot.

 

[beardown07]

Broken collar bone for White, season is over, bear career is over before it began.

Maybe now Gentry get a real shot.

Almost HAVE to think they bring him up.



The play where White got hurt didn't even really look bad? I so wanted that kid to be a stud, but I think it's safe to say he is a bust.

 

[anotheridiot]

Almost HAVE to think they bring him up.

The play where White got hurt didn't even really look bad? I so wanted that kid to be a stud, but I think it's safe to say he is a bust.

Watching Amari Cooper on the highlight reel carry 8 guys 6 yards to get in the end zone showed us who the stud was. What the hell was he even doing in the back field on that play?

 

[Skerpokes]

1. vs Atlanta.........W
2. @ Tampa Bay.....L
3. vs Pittsburgh......L
4. @ Green Bay......L
5. vs Minnesota......W
6. @ Baltimore.......L
7. vs Carolina.........W
8 @ New Orleans.....L
9. BYE............
10. vs Green Bay......W
11. vs Detroit...........W
12. @ Philadelphia.....L
13. vs San Fran.........W
14. @ Cincinnati........L
15. @ Detroit............W
16 vs. Cleveland........W
17. @ Minnesota........L

1st Half: 3-5
2nd Half: 5-3

TOTAL: 8-8
2nd in the North
*NO PLAYOFFS*

Final North Standings

1 - Green Bay 12-4
2 - Chicago 8-8
3 - Minnesota 6-10
4 - Detroit 5-11

NOTES: Bears prove what many with knowledge of the team feel to be true. Which is that they have more talent than they're given credit for. They struggle with a tough schedule early on, but hold their own in most every contest and prove that they're not a team to be taken lightly. Then, the W's start to roll in during the second half of the season a bit. The run game and defense both show very promising signs. However, at the end of the day, their offensive fire power just isn't enough to push them to a winning record or a wild card spot.

There won't be a post-season for the Bears, but feelings of optimism begin to build in Chicago heading into the off-season. The Bears commit full-time to Mitch Trubisky as their starting QB, and all systems are a go to add the necessary pieces to make a run towards a playoff spot in the 2018 campaign.

I like the analysis but I can't picture the Bears finishing ahead of Green Bay AND Minnesota this year

 

[richig07]

I like the analysis but I can't picture the Bears finishing ahead of Green Bay AND Minnesota this year

I clearly have Green Bay at 12-4 man.

Maybe you mean Minnesota and Detroit?

Sorry, but Detroit was easily one of the worst 10 teams in football last year, and I don't see where they got better. A sloppy win vs what appears to be a pretty damn bad Arizona team, doesn't much change that.

Minnesota looked better than I anticipated, but it's early and that was a pretty bad D that Bradford lit up. So, I'm not going to overreact.

Detroit gets the cellar. Minnesota and us will both be around 8 wins, give or take depending on health.

 

[Skerpokes]

Detroit gets the cellar. Minnesota and us will both be around 8 wins, give or take depending on health.

This I can agree with. I'd give Minnesota a slight edge

 

[richig07]

This I can agree with. I'd give Minnesota a slight edge

Agreed. Depends on our H2H match-ups.

We have two game-manager QB's, with decent looking defense's. They have a superior WR corp. We have a better O-line and RB. They have the edge on D, but that gap could close.

I think they'll be two close defensive games, that could go either way. We usually fair well vs them at home, and visa versa.

 

[richig07]

Also, did anyone become a little less fearful of our match-up with New Orleans next month, after watching that Monday night game? I did. That team needs a rebuild.

Especially without Cooks. If it wasn't for Brees, that team could be competing for a top draft pick.

 

[Ice_nine]

Sorry, but Detroit was easily one of the worst 10 teams in football last year, and I don't see where they got better. A sloppy win vs what appears to be a pretty damn bad Arizona team, doesn't much change that.

I hate Detroit, and want you to kick their ass, but in no universe except yours were they easily one of the 10 worst teams in the league. Aside from being 9-7, they only missed the playoffs due to tiebreaker, with only two losses by more than 7 points to very tough road opponents (NYG and Dallas). Hate them all you want, but they weren't bottom 10 last year, and after improving both lines, hard to see how they are worse this year.

A shame about Freeman getting hurt though, always liked that guy. And Cohen is fun to watch!

 

[richig07]

I hate Detroit, and want you to kick their ass, but in no universe except yours were they easily one of the 10 worst teams in the league. Aside from being 9-7, they only missed the playoffs due to tiebreaker, with only two losses by more than 7 points to very tough road opponents (NYG and Dallas). Hate them all you want, but they weren't bottom 10 last year, and after improving both lines, hard to see how they are worse this year.

A shame about Freeman getting hurt though, always liked that guy. And Cohen is fun to watch!

They made the playoffs. Got hammered by SEA in the WC round.

They had a negative point differential, and beat only one team with a winning record. The playoff-less 9-7 Redskins.

I'm not sure that they ever won a game by more than one score, and trailed most of those in the 4th. They would have lost to the Bears twice, if not for back-to-back holding calls in the 2nd match-up. Which took them out of FG range and ALSO called back a pass that would have had them at the 5. With 25 seconds left.

They were about a 5 win team last year (same point differential as SD). The worst post-season team I have personally ever seen.

 

[Ice_nine]

oh, you'e right. I forgot the Seahawks beat them badly in playoffs in Seattle. Not really that unusual. Worst playoff team you've ever seen though? Come on man, unless you are like 6, that's ridiculous. So they won and lost a bunch of close games, Hardly makes them bad. You have no recognition of talent if you truly think they were that bad. You are just letting the alcohol do the talking.

 

[richig07]

@Ice_nine

Here's a run-down, which I feel is perfectly clear. Starting with point differential, that we've already touched on.

Here is the point differential for team's finishing 13th-26th in the league last year. As you can see, Detroit comes in towards the 25th and 26th finishing Panthers and Chargers. This is all of the teams just outside of the playoffs, all the way to the top 6 draft picks. Before we see a clear drop-off to the league's worst teams. (Point differentials of around -100 or worse)

Titans +3
Bucs -15
Broncos +36
Skins +13
Ravens +22
Vikings +20
Colts +19
Arizona +56
Bills +21
Saints +15
Eagles +36
Bengals +10
Panthers -33
Chargers -13

As you can see, 13-24 only sees only one team with a negative point differential. 25 and 26 (SD and CAR) both start to creep into the negative.

Detroit was at -12. Indicating, they were extremely lucky to have a winning record and really had a more similar season to those two teams who won around 5-6 games.

OFFENSIVELY: They were 20th in points for. 21st in yardage.

DEFENSIVELY: 13th in points against. 18th in yardage.

They had a negative turnover differential

They were tied at 19th in the league with a turnover margin per game at -0.1.

They had a minus 1.40 SRS, which combines a teams strength of schedule and point differential to weigh a team versus the rest of the league. -1.40 puts them in the bottom 10.

They had the 24th ranked strength of schedule

They had easily the worst strength of victory, among any team .500 or better. (Couldn't find this for losing teams)

Average wins by opponents beaten: 6.333

Average margin of victory: 5.0

They lost two games by multiple scores. Won only one game by two scores.




Must I go on with this? They were a bad football team. A team with these numbers making the playoffs? Startling.

 

[Ice_nine]

my goodness. The NFL playoffs are littered with teams that have made the playoffs with negative point differentials. Including teams that won the Super Bowl. I'm not going to look up every season, but the Seahawks made it a few years ago with like a -100 differential. While playing in a shitty division much worse than last years NFC North.

Your other points neither prove they were a bottom 10 team nor the worst team in playoff history. But you are welcome to think that they do. You can also think shots of Jaeger are classy.

 

[richig07]

my goodness. The NFL playoffs are littered with teams that have made the playoffs with negative point differentials. Including teams that won the Super Bowl. I'm not going to look up every season, but the Seahawks made it a few years ago with like a -100 differential. While playing in a shitty division much worse than last years NFC North.

Your other points neither prove they were a bottom 10 team nor the worst team in playoff history. But you are welcome to think that they do. You can also think shots of Jaeger are classy.

LMAO. Ignoring all of the other stats I posed. Point differential was one of many.

You're on the losing side of this bub.

You do not have an argument. I will post again.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

OFFENSIVELY: They were 20th in points for. 21st in yardage.

DEFENSIVELY: 13th in points against. 18th in yardage.

They had a negative turnover differential

They were tied at 19th in the league with a turnover margin per game at -0.1.

They had a minus 1.40 SRS, which combines a teams strength of schedule and point differential to weigh a team versus the rest of the league. -1.40 puts them in the bottom 10.

They had the 24th ranked strength of schedule

They had easily the worst strength of victory, among any team .500 or better. (Couldn't find this for losing teams)

Average wins by opponents beaten: 6.333

Average margin of victory: 5.0

They lost two games by multiple scores. Won only one game by two scores.

 

[richig07]

Oh no... @Ice_nine You were blatantly dishonest too? How embarrassing. No wonder you didn't "feel like looking past seasons up".

I did... it took me all of two seconds.

Let's take a look at this league LITTERED with teams to make the playoffs with a negative point differential prior to the 2016 season.

Also, that Seahawks team had a 7-9 record. Lol. Yeah, quite likely they had a negative point differential to couple with their losing record.

Every team in NFL history to make the playoffs with a negative point differential • r/nfl

Notes

• Since the merger, 38 teams have made the postseason with a negative point differential. Only one of them has made the Super Bowl (New York Giants in Super Bowl XLVI), which they won.
  
  
• The combined record of teams in the playoffs with a negative point differential is 25-37. Three times, they have advanced to the conference championship round.
  
  
• The two times that a team received a bye into the divisional round with a negative point differential was under the old playoff format prior to 1990, where all division winners got byes into the divisional round.
  
  
• The highest record to make the playoffs with a negative point differential is the Indianapolis Colts at 11-5 in 2012. Their point differential was -30.
  
  
• The worst point differential to ever make the playoffs was -97, when the Seattle Seahawks made it in 2010.
  
  
• During the strike-shortened season of 1982, sixteen teams made the playoffs out of twenty-eight. Take that into account when you realize how many bad teams made it in that year
  
  
• On paper, the 2004 playoff matchup between the Seahawks and the Rams may have been the worst in NFL history. Both teams had a negative point differential. The game actually turned out to be a solid one (Rams won 27-20 in the final few minutes).
  

 

[Ice_nine]

what's the saying. If at first you don't succeed try and try again? I guess you should try again. This time, it might even work! Don't forget another cocktail!

Cheers buddy. I'm not going to tell you that your mother should be fucked or some of the other completely outrageous things you have said to me just because you are losing an argument. I'm just going to wish you another merry drink.

 

[Ice_nine]

Oh no... @Ice_nine You were blatantly dishonest too? How embarrassing. No wonder you didn't "feel like looking past seasons up".

I did... it took me all of two seconds.

Let's take a look at this league LITTERED with teams to make the playoffs with a negative point differential prior to the 2016 season.

Also, that Seahawks team had a 7-9 record. Lol. Yeah, quite likely they had a negative point differential to couple with their losing record.

Every team in NFL history to make the playoffs with a negative point differential • r/nfl

Notes

• Since the merger, 38 teams have made the postseason with a negative point differential. Only one of them has made the Super Bowl (New York Giants in Super Bowl XLVI), which they won.
  
  
• The combined record of teams in the playoffs with a negative point differential is 25-37. Three times, they have advanced to the conference championship round.
  
  
• The two times that a team received a bye into the divisional round with a negative point differential was under the old playoff format prior to 1990, where all division winners got byes into the divisional round.
  
  
• The highest record to make the playoffs with a negative point differential is the Indianapolis Colts at 11-5 in 2012. Their point differential was -30.
  
  
• The worst point differential to ever make the playoffs was -97, when the Seattle Seahawks made it in 2010.
  
  
• During the strike-shortened season of 1982, sixteen teams made the playoffs out of twenty-eight. Take that into account when you realize how many bad teams made it in that year
  
  
• On paper, the 2004 playoff matchup between the Seahawks and the Rams may have been the worst in NFL history. Both teams had a negative point differential. The game actually turned out to be a solid one (Rams won 27-20 in the final few minutes).

hey appreciate you finding this, some good info. 38 teams. So most years at least one. OK, you are right, I was "lying when I said the Seahawks had 100. It was actually 97. That was from memory. Boy you sure busted me good. Have another drink, my friend.